CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Cyclists dismounting to pass *obstructions"

(26 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. Bigjack
    Member

    As I hadn't cycled over the FRB for some months and did so yesterday, I noted the fenced off sections for maintenance works are far longer than last time (100+ m) . Just wondered how many fellow cyclists dismount and pass "obstructions" on the bridge as the signs instruct. I've never understood the logic of the instruction other than to assist inexperienced cyclists who aren't able to turn their handlebars and brake if necessary. I'm not sure if it includes the maintenance vehicle drivers as I've never seen them get out of the cab and push!

    Posted 11 months ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    "Just wondered how many fellow cyclists dismount and pass "obstructions" on the bridge as the signs instruct. I've never understood the logic "

    This has certainly been discussed here before.

    I thought FRB had conceded that this didn't make sense (though they did try to 'explain').

    Don't know if this is reverting to a previous practice or it never changed.

    Regular riders will comment soon!

    Posted 11 months ago #
  3. paddyirish
    Member

    Commute over the bridge and have never dismounted along there. "Proceed with caution" is the usual advice, more so for commuters in winter with the odd ninja pedestrian about...

    Posted 11 months ago #
  4. acsimpson
    Member

    Yes, I think Bax confirmed that the official (FETA?) advice was to ignore the signs. The Amey operating unit no longer run a twitter account so no simple open way to ask them a question.

    I suspect the longer fenced in areas areas are an Amey thing. They become a real problem when vehicles are operating as there is very little space left to pass a large flatbed, especially if they have stopped half way along for a natter with their colleagues.

    The sign which I laugh at is one which says cyclists dismount and use footway. I wonder what they want us to use it for if not cycling (if pushing a bike I would be a pedestrian not a cyclist) and if we are to cycle along it what is the point of dismounting at the start?

    Posted 11 months ago #
  5. Frenchy
    Member

    The sign which I laugh at is one which says cyclists dismount and use footway.

    To be fair, I'm not sure how I would word this. Would a simple "Cyclists dismount" be (semantically) preferable?

    Posted 11 months ago #
  6. ejstubbs
    Member

    @acsimpson: The sign which I laugh at is one which says cyclists dismount and use footway. I wonder what they want us to use it for if not cycling (if pushing a bike I would be a pedestrian not a cyclist)

    I think you've understood it correctly: you are requested to dismount, at which point you become a pedestrian, and then you can use the footway. I'm not sure why that might be amusing but each to his own I suppose.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  7. Bigjack
    Member

    I agree with paddyirish and others in that proceeding with caution is the best action. There were similar signs for cyclists and equestrians to dismount when crossing railway bridges on minor roads near Winchburgh and Philpstoun, but these seem to have been removed some time ago (perhaps by cyclists or equestrians!)

    Posted 11 months ago #
  8. acsimpson
    Member

    If they don't want people cycling past then as far as I am aware the only applicable sign is a black bike on a white background in a red circle.

    As has been mentioned elsewhere the very least which would be required to make sense of a dismount sign is a remount sign located further along the path.

    If they want cyclists to push their bikes then dismount and push would be better than dismount and use footway which leaves everyone to decide on exactly what to use the footway for while. So once I have dismounted (which I don't) I can then use the footway to cycle and their A has not been C'd should anything happen while I proceed with care.

    If they are considering people not riding their bikes to still be cyclists then I wonder how they expect me to dismount when I am walking/running across.

    It's these rather ridiculous notions that I laugh at more than their anti cyclist attitude.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  9. biketrain
    Member

    I am reluctant to get off my bike at a 'Cyclist Dismount' sign until some invents an antidote sign to counter the original instruction. Without this I may never be able to ride a bike again.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  10. bax
    Member

    When i argued with FETA that the FRB dismount signs made no sense as there were too many of them for it to be reasonable to comply, they merely stated that there is no legal compulsion and i was free to ignore the signs

    So they had no appetite for rational debate on the matter

    Posted 11 months ago #
  11. Bigjack
    Member

    I'm just waiting for someone walking on the bridge to tell me I should be obeying the signs!

    Posted 11 months ago #
  12. handcyclist
    Member

    My understanding is the the Highway Code suggests cyclists *should* dismount when a "Cyclists Dismount" sign is displayed so it isn't a legal requirement.
    As a disabled handcyclist I always ignore these as I imagine it would be even more dangerous for me to be crawling along the cycle path trying to drag my handcycle behind me.

    However, what should I be doing when I see a sign like the one displayed at the current roadworks on the west side of the former Burnshot bridge which says "Cyclists *must* dismount through roadworks" (my emphasis on the *must*) ?
    Does this imply an actual legal requirement to dismount?

    It is somewhat moot as I've been through these roadworks twice recently and they are so muddy at the moment that I'm taking the longer and hillier route through Dalmeny village to avoid the detritus.

    Posted 11 months ago #
  13. neddie
    Member

    @handcyclist

    I do hope you write to your councillors every time you come across one of these signs to explain your predicament & choices

    Posted 11 months ago #
  14. bax
    Member

    to: OCCR.FBScotland@amey.co.uk

    I was cycling northbound on Forth Road Bridge today, 8th february, at around 15:00, and at the north end of the bridge, there is a curve in the cycleway around a bus stop.

    Beyond this, I suddenly encountered an unmanned bulldozer parked upon, and fully blocking the cycleway. No warning in place.

    This was a mere second or two beyond the bus stop, which obscured the bulldozer. Despite observing a sensible speed, I was very lucky to brake in time to not go head first into the bulldozer.

    Workers in orange vests were standing around the vicinity, loading stuff onto a flatbed truck. The truck was in the bus lane, which is where the bulldozer also should have been. When I explained that the bulldozer situation was not OK, they merely grinned and remained silent.

    There was no valid reason for the unmanned bulldozer to be parked upon and fully obstructing the cycleway just beyond the bus stop.

    Your contractors cavalier attitude towards cyclist safety is completely unacceptable.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  15. chdot
    Admin

    "Your contractors cavalier attitude towards cyclist safety is completely unacceptable."

    Indeed.

    Looking forward to reading reply.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  16. bax
    Member

    Looking forward to reading reply

    usually i'd ask a specific question to at least provoke a corporate bot drone-echo

    but not expecting a reply. i certainly didn't get one when i complained about a step ladder left on the FRB concourse in the dark

    Posted 9 months ago #
  17. Bigjack
    Member

    A close shave Bax and hope you get a good response.I often laugh at the hi -vis/safety helmet culture of the construction industry when it is often entirely contradicted by actions such as vehicles being parked dangerously or illegally around construction sites!

    Posted 9 months ago #
  18. gembo
    Member

    @bigjack good point. See also all the signs construction firms put up on their sites about health and safety, noise etc. Considerate construction companies, with vans of their workforce parked wherever they like.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  19. dougal
    Member

    I presume there are independent surveyors for H&S breaches (with severe penalties?) on construction sites, otherwise companies would pay as much attention to it internally as they do outside the fences.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  20. paddyirish
    Member

    @bax - a 3-4 ft long piece of solid metal cable (2cm in diameter) on the path this morning just where you mentioned the bulldozer being. I rode over it thinking it was a branch and luckily nothing bad happened. I gave it my best Miss Trunchbull hammer throw far into the bushes.

    Then on the bridge an empty van was parked at the narrowest point of the path while the driver had a smoko. Had to dismount to pass.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  21. Bigjack
    Member

    Yea,the HSE focus on the hot topics as they're terribly under-resourced. As long as hi vis has been worn then all is good.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  22. bax
    Member

    right old barney on the bridge this morning !

    regulars might be aware of the north tower van man, leaving little room to get through between fence and van

    he usually gives it a tirade about dismount, even though that would give even less room to get past, if he had thought it through

    anyway today as i approached the scene he was right in my face with both fists raised and frothing at the mouth

    certainly seconds away from a right hook to the chops

    woah lad... i calmed him down enough to lower the fists, but the frothing and swearing was unabated

    frankly i wasn't too perturbed by the drama

    i told his emerging compadres that i'd let this one go

    (so don't link to this on social media)

    their apologetic explanation is that allegedly there's a cyclist passing daily who scrapes against the van and mirror etc

    so the old guy either thought it was me or has lumped us all as a single user

    anyway go canny if you're passing north tower in the morning, old bloke's at the end of his tether

    Posted 8 months ago #
  23. jonty
    Member

    You were threatened with violence - by a maintainence contractor - for simply using one of Scotland's primary transport links?

    How have we got to the point where that's even remotely acceptable?

    Posted 8 months ago #
  24. paddyirish
    Member

    @bax

    Thanks for this- was all quiet when I went across (a bit later than you, I guess), but have noticed one guy who tries to park at the narrowest point on the path to try to inconvenience other bridge users, but didn't know that he could be threatening too.

    I won't be holding back on reporting that sort of stuff if it happens to me.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  25. bax
    Member

    admittedly you're right, jonty

    the old guy lost it and somehow i felt magnanimous enough at the time to think 'i don't want this old geezer losing his job for a daft moment of madness' rather than anything else

    i don't know what they are currently doing at north tower, but the van has a pipe from the front cab window going into the tower, and they're doing it on east and west footpath simultaneously, around 9am

    the first thing they could do is switch this particular guy over to the west footpath tower where there are no cyclists during the week

    furthermore, they could remove the long fence at the tower so there is plenty room for cycle traffic to pass an adjacent van and trailer

    anyway i'll keep an eye on the situation - hopefully today's conflict will give pause for reflection on their end

    Posted 8 months ago #
  26. bax
    Member

    I won't be holding back on reporting that sort of stuff if it happens to me.

    that's why i'm posting the incident here, paddy

    he's had his free pass from me today

    but if anyone else gets similar treatment, then i'd go formal

    Posted 8 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin